Augmented Reality
Or, seeing life through rose-coloured Google Glasses. Technology You Can Wear Google Glass has quite publicly been in development for the last two years. Its release promises to revolutionize the way that we interact with the world. It is true that this type head-mounted of wearable computer is not the first ever invented, but it’s projected worldwide availability will be unparalleled to that of any previous incarnation. And once this technology is released, it will inevitably be the harbinger of other types of wearable technologies, which will have the potential to truly change the way that its users interact with the world. The world will be viewed through a mediated and intelligent screen. This type of mediated existence has been termed “augmented reality.” Viseu explains that augmented reality : relies on the coupling of a human or nonhuman actor with a computational device that participates in the processing of information. Rather than building self-contained machines, machines and humans are coupled together into a new hybrid actor. Rather than leaving the body behind, real world information and computer generated information are brought together, allowing the individual to simultaneously affect and be affected by both realities (18). Though wearable technologies such as Google Glass are quite visible to the wearer and the outside world, there are many forms of wearable technology that blend seamlessly into our lives. Cranny-Francis highlights that many producers have been integrating computer technologies into clothing fibers and in jewelry. This seamless integration demonstrates how we are embodying these technologies (366). Wearable technologies can therefore be seen as the integration of technology into the corporeal rather than simple external tools. For instance, Viseu states that “in an augmented culture, the human body is no longer extended through technology it becomes its host, creating new synergies between both” (24). X-Reality is the New Augmented Reality The issue with the perspectives of Viseu and Cranny-Francis is that they view augmentation as a result of wearable technologies, as described above. But isn’t our current existence, still before the widespread advent of wearable technologies such as Google Glass and computerized clothing and accessories, already augmented? Do we not already live our lives through a mediated filter? In her book Hello Avatar, Coleman proposes that individuals in networked societies see their existences online and offline overlap. As connected human agents, we exist in both the physical space we occupy and in our boundless digital worlds. Our engagements in both worlds are simultaneous and complementary. Expanding from the constricted definition of augmented reality, Coleman terms this pervasive mediated existence as “X-reality” (19-20). She explains that in this realm, “neither geographic territory nor corporeal embodiment stand as the exclusive indication of being somewhere or present" (36). Why is it then that we are compelled to inhabit this world of neither here or there? Coleman argues that this hybrid living can serve to empower individuals and gives them “a strong sense of identification” (49). As an example, consider the world of Second Life in which users can be whoever they want and interact with anyone with another account across the world. Their interactions are instantaneous. The same goes for emailing, texting, Skyping or "Facebooking." Our real-time interactions in the digital world can serve as tools for for actors to state delinieate their existences in a world that is ubiquitously connected. As these tools become vernacular to the point that the message transcends the medium, the medium ingrains itself as an intrinsic component of the user. Where is My Agency? There is, however, an important caveat that should be mentioned. The model of X-reality tends to oversimplify the agency of the networked being. The fact that we interact with mediated tools does not inherently mean that we view the world through an augmented lens. As free agents, we have the power to separate ourselves from our networked identity. In a study by Conrad, Charles and Heale, the researchers found that many students who situated themselves as “e-citizens” of the world viewed their online identities as parallel and detached beings rather than fully inegrated entities. Other individuals, on the other hand, viewed both identities as overlapping and simultaneaous (272). Our place in the networked society and our relationship with it is therefore linked with our individual agencies. Citizenship and participation in the augemented realm of existence are not essentially one in the same. Taking Part in the Game The X-reality and augmented reality theories advanced by the scholars discussed above are therefore entirely possible as long as users are willing to take part in the process and see it as beneficial. In contrast, consider that the Luddite’s worldview is just as beneficial to its adopter than X-reality is to the engaged networked individual. In other words, X-reality is only possible if we are willing to accept pervasive media as part of our everyday lives. So, will you come out and play? Works Cited Coleman, B. Hello Avatar: Rise of the Networked Generation. London: MIT Press, 2011. Print. Conrad, Marc, Alec Charles, and Jo Neale. "What Is My Avatar? Who Is My Avatar? The Avatar as a Device to Achieve a Goal: Perceptions and Implications." Reinventing Ourselves: Contemporary Concepts of Identity in Virtual Worlds. Ed. Anna Peachey and Mark Childs. London: Springer, 2011. Web. 253-73. Oct. 23, 2013. Cranny-Francis, Anne. "From Extension to Engagement: Mapping the Imaginary of Wearable Technology."'' Visual Communication'' 7.3 (2008): 363-82. Web. Oct. 23, 2013. Viseu, Ana. "Simulation and Augmentation: Issues of Wearable Computers." Ethics and Information Technology 5 (2003): 17-26. Web. Oct. 23, 2013.